First National Bank v. Augur

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an inmate had no due process rights during prosecutorial appeal of parole order
• holding that the Board’s decision to resolve conflicting evidence does not amount to an abuse of discretion
• “It is not an abuse of discretion for two fact-finders to reach different conclusions from the complex and potentially conflicting information within a prisoner’s record.”
• “[T]here is no abuse of discretion when a court or a fact-finder faced with conflicting information makes a reasonable and principled decision regarding which side to believe.”
• “[A] reviewing court may not substitute its judgment for that of the Board.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).